the gentleman from south carolina brought this particular budget proposal to the floor of the house. we hope he will vote for it. with that i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from florida who is a terrific member of the budget committee, ms. castor. the chair: the gentlelady from florida is recognized for two minutes. ms. castor: democrats and republicans agree that deficit reduction is important. in fact, over the past year and a half we have achieved over $2.7 trillion in debt reduction. now the republicans want to take us through a charade with this tea party budget. if enacted, the republican budget would weaken america's recovery. it would undermine what makes america great and what makes america strong. like education, the ability of students to attend college, medical research and inthe noah vation, the about of -- ability of our older neighbors to live their lives in dignity in their

retirement years through medicare and long-term care. now we get a lot of advice and economists across the board, in fact, our own congressional budget office, advise that the best and fastest way to reduce the deficit to is to make sure people across america have jobs and are working. it is inexplicable that the republican budget proposes to eliminate jobs in construction, in education, scientific research, and instead heaps the burden on middle class families. experts predict the republican budget will reresult in job losses of two million fewer jobs next year alone. that's on top of 750,000 jobs lost by the end of the year due to the sequester republicans will not replace. just as the economy is improving for our neighbors and small businesses back home. in contrast, the democratic alternative will cren rate 1.2 million more job, stop the sequester and in committee,

democrats proposed to close those special interest tax loopholes that riddle our tax code, republicans said no. democrats proposed to offset unwise republican cuts to medical research like alzheimer's, cancer, diabetes research at n.i.h., republicans said no. democrats tried to cut the special interest spending in the tax code to offset republican cuts to students who rely on pell grants but republicans said no. mr. van hollen: i yield the gentleman another minute and a half. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. ms. castor: the democrats in the budget committee proposed to strengthen medicare and replace the republican plan to turn medicare into a voucher program. all it does is simply shift the cost tour families and older neighbors. mr. speaker, this republican budget is not consistent with american values. it is not fiscally responsible.

it is a charade, it is a capitulation to the tea party. it does not serve us well in economic recovery and the ways we want to grow america. it's a plan for economic weakness. it's a receding vision of american greatness. in education, scientific research, and infrastructure, and dignity for our parents and grandparents in their retirement years. i urge you to vote no on the republican budget and support the balanced democratic alternative. i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. the chair reminds members that the gentleman from south carolina has two minutes remain, the gentleman from maryland has one minute remaining and the right to close. the chair recognizes the gentleman from south carolina. mr. mulvaney: i yield one minute to the other gentleman, mr. mcclintock. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcclintock: our problems

can be summed up in three 37, , 39, 22, and -- 39, 64. 39% is -- 37% is the revenues. this has never been a revenue problem, it has always been a pending problem. further accelerates spending, with $1 trillion of new tacks. despite the trillion dollars of new taxes they can't balance their budget. there is a reason. because it is a spending problem and trying to address it on the revenue side will drive more and more spending until we become greece or detroit. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expire. the gentleman from south arolina.

mr. mulvaney: last time i was accused of doing something for a political reason was no budget new york pay, so i will take that. i will ask my friend if he's more bothered by this political stunt or the stunt of the president of the united states by not offering a budget. we had time to do one, he had time to do one, the president clearly had time to do one and is not offering it to us. that said, i want to thank my friend from maryland for reminding us once again that only in washington, d.c. can a cut never cut, can a freeze never freeze, and a balanced approach to a budget never balance. thank you. the chair: the gentleman yield back his time? the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. chairman. i would just ask our colleagues to take a look at the latest

analysis put forward by our own budget office, the referees here. what they tell us is half of the deficit in this year is a result of the fact that millions of americans are still looking for work. three quarters of the projected deficit next year is for the very reason which is why we get to the heart of the issue by going after the jobs deficit and then reducing the deficit in a balanced manner over a long period of time. the issue isn't whether we reduce our deficits dramatically, it's how we do it. we call for a balanced approach that, yes, asks the very wealthy people to get rid of some of their special interest tax breaks which our republican colleagues concede they have but get rid of them in part to reduce the deficit. our colleagues refuse to take one penny from closing tax loopholes, not one, to help reduce the deficit. they'll only do that to help finance tax breaks for higher income individuals.

so mr. chairman, we focus right now on jobs, growing the economy and a balanced approach to deficit reduction. i yield back the plans of my time. the chair: all time for debate has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from south carolina. as many as are in favor signify by saying aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes have it. mr. mulvaney: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18 further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from south carolina will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 2 prinned in house report 113-21. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? mr. scott: i rise as the designee of the congressional black caucus to offer an amendment. the chair: the clerk will offer an amendment -- will read the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2 in the nature of a substitute offered by mr. scott of virginia. the chair: pursuant to house

resolution 122, the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott, and a member opposed will reach control -- will each control 15 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: i yield myself two minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. scott: mr. chairman, the underlying republican budget dismantles the medicare guarantee, cuts medicaid in the last year by 25% and includes unspessitied -- unspecified cuts in a category called mandatory spending, that is social security and pensions for veterans and federal employees and then it cuts other essential federal programs. it also repeals obamacare but keeps in place the savings and tax increases that pay for it. republican budget also includes a $5.7 trillion tax cut. that primarily benefits the wealthiest americans and somehow claims it will be revenue neutral by raising

someone else's taxes $5.7 trillion an average of $,000 for every man, woman, and child in america every year the congressional black caucus budget, on the other hand, is based on reality and uses real numbers. our budget makes tough choices but not at the ex-novense most vulnerable americans. the c.b.c. budget calls for revenue enhancements over the next 10 years. the budget shows this is a real and achieveable goal by highlighting approximately $4.2 trillion in revenue options that the congress could use to achieve the $2.7 trillion in new revenues, such as limiting the deductibility of corporate interest payments, limiting the special tax breaks and corporate loopholes that are bake intured tax code, treating capital gains and dividends like regular income. and incidentally this amount is less than half of the $5.7 trillion of tax increases

assumed in the republican budget. the budget will be used to cancel the sequester to pay for a $500 billion jobs bill to put more than five million americans back to work and provide for an additional $300 billion in long-term investments in our economy through education, job training, health care, and science and resedge. i yield myself an additional 30 seconds. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: even with these additional investments, this is needed to put our economy back on a sustainable path because it's more than the simpson-bowles deficit reduction 10-year goal. the c.b.c. budget shows we can create jobs, invest in education, transportation, and research and avoid devastating health care cuts and achieve the 10-year simpson-bowles deficit reduction goal and i urge my colleagues to support the congressional black caucus budget.

i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? >> i claim the time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. broun: i want to comment my -- commend my friend mr. scott for bringing forward a budget on behalf of the congressional black caucus. i think it's important we have all sorts of options here on the floor to be able to discuss, i would note a couple of items that he conveniently left out, one is that the budget that the c.b.c. brings to the floor, this will come as no surprise, mr. chairman, never gets to balance, which means it continues to spend more money than the government takes in. continue os soned -- to spend more money than washington takes in, and the people of this great country understand we can't continue going down this road over and over and over. a couple of points that mr. scott made regarding the republican budget which is the budget that is the base budget here that we're bringing to the floor that in fact does get to balance in a responsible way.

it saves an strengthens and secures medicare as opposed to the misinformation that was provided by the other side. it makes certain that states have the kind of flexibility so they're able to provide the highest quality of health care to their medicaid population. it doesn't, as a matter of fact, address in a specific way the issue of social security because it provides for a reserve fund so that's able to be addressed in a more specific way through the committee structure which is also the important thing to recognize about the issue of tacks. our friends on the other side are specific about what they accuse us of regarding tax bus as you know, mr. chairman, it's the ways and means committee that will ultimately define that. a couple of items that he conveniently left out on the budget he is proposing is that they do raise taxes. in fact, they raise taxes by $2.8 trillion. $2.8 trillion. over the next 10 years. and much of that increase in taxes is in the area of those

who create jobs. and as we all know if you tax something you get less of it. by taxing job creators, we get fewer jobs and mr. chairman, that's the last place we need to be heading right now. they spend $5.7 trillion, rillion with a t t-r, than the republican budget being proposed and they add another $2.9 trillion to the debt relative to the base budget that we're working on today. i also want to address the issue of taxes take talk about removing the incentives that move jobs overseas. the biggest insentive to moving jobs overseas is that the united states now has the highest, the highest business tax rate in the industrialized world. if you're a business and you're planning on either expanding your business or you're thinking about starting a business here in the united states and you go to the line that says taxes, the other side

of that says, no. go somewhere else. get out of here. because taxes are lower elsewhere. which means that jobs are being created elsewhere. we are driving jobs overseas by virtue of our current tax structure and our friends on the other side of the aisle especially with the c.b.c. budget. i do however want to commend them once again for bringing a budget forward because as you heard earlier today and in the conversations around the budget, the president has not. we did find it, found the president's budget, here it is. not a doggone thing on this poster, mr. chairman. because the president hasn't brought anything to us. that might be amusing to some but the fact of the matter is that the law states that the president of the united states is required to present a budget to congress by the first monday in february.

that was the first monday in february, we are six weeks beyond that, the president has flagrantly, flagrantly ignored his statutory responsibility to bring to the united states congress a budget. now some folks on the other side say, it happens all the time. don't worry about that. it happens all the time. well, as a matter of fact, mr. chairman, just one term, president obama has missed the budget deadline more than any other president. he's now missed it four out of five times. in the 90 years between 1923 and 2013, president obama is the only president to miss the deadline two years in a row. he's the only president who missed the deadline three out of four years in his first term and he holds the record for the longest delay, 98 days, maybe he's -- maybe that's the record, he's trying to beat. so i want to commend again my colleagues in the congressional black caucus for bringing forward a budget. i think it's extremely important that we have all

sorts of different ideas out here on the floor to be able to debate and have people take a perspective on and have the opportunity to vote yay or nay on, i would respectfully suggest, however, that their budget move this is country in the wrong direction, not the right direction and we'll urge opposition to their budget proposalened i reserve the balance of our time. the chair: the gentleman reserves, the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: i yield to a member of the budget committee, ms. moore. the chair: the gentlelady from wisconsin is recognized for two minutes. ms. moore: thank you, mr. chair. i'd like to ask unanimous consent to be able to revise and extend my remarks. the chair: without objection, so ordered. ms. moore: well, thank you so much to the gentleman from virginia for yielding me time. it's really my privilege to discuss the jobs program that is at the heart of the congressional black caucus budget. the congressional black caucus does acknowledge that while we must address our debt and

an cits in the short run, austerity budget, as republicans proposed, hurts our economy rather than helps. we proposed a comprehensive jobs plan paid for proudly with the largess in the revenue that the rich has seached and tax reform measures that will propel our economic recovery for everyone, not just the halves, improve the economic competitiveness and provide opportunity for communities who have not reaped from the economic resurgence. it includes a $100 billion investment in a job creation program, estimated to create two million jobs directly as well as another 800,000 jobs indirectly in the private sector. $50 billion for school modernization. $50 for preserving teacher, law enforcement and first responder

jobs. good public service jobs that we all need. $230 billion for investing in our nation's crumbling infrastructure. $50 billion in rebuilding america's neighborhoods. $13 billion in job training programs. and another $7 billion in summer jobs programs. our significant investments in jobs is the core reason why i urge my colleagues to vote yes on the congressional black caucus budget, and i yield back to the gentleman. the chair: the gentlelady yields back her time. the gentleman from georgia. mr. price: how much time remains on each side? the chair: the gentleman has 9 3/4 minutes remaining and the gentleman from virginia has 10 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. price: thank you, mr. chairman. i'm pleased to yield three minutes to a member of the budget committee, the gentleman from indiana, mr. rokita. the chair: the gentleman from indiana is recognized for throw minutes. mr. rokita: i thank the

gentleman from georgia for yielding me time. i agree with the gentleman from georgia, it's good to have debate, it's good to have choices, it's good to have options but that doesn't mean that every option is equally good, and we're faced with the situation right here and right now and that's why i rise in opposition to the c.b.c. substitute budget. there are different ways to balance a budget. many most americans, many of us here think taking 20% of the value of a country's g.d.p., like this federal government does, and spends it is more than enough to run it. most everything else. but to be fair there are other ways to balance and one of the ways is to raise revenue. i want to examine just a few of the way that the substitute budget proposes to run the federal government by raising revenue. i see from all the different ideas here that their intention was to take from who they believe are the richest americans, the wealthiest americans, those who haven't paid their fair share, the 1%,

however you want to phrase it but let's look at it more closely. one, taxing capital gains and dividends as ordinary income at a top rate of 39.6%. i think this budget forgets how many middle class americans have 401-k's, how many of us invest in the stock market, how many old union members on pension plans, dinosaur plans, still rely on a stock market for their retirement. what will the capital gains do to them? they're not the richest for sure. taxing financial transactions at .25% of the assets' valid, same thing, mr. chairman. what about all the middle class individuals, so many americans in this country that rely for their retirement not just on cial security but on foik -- 401-k's, union members who rely on pensions and what about those who are simply taking more from them, from their

retirement? and perhaps the most insidious, returning estate tax levels to 2009. not only are we taxing twice but we are making it a bad thing apparently to pass on our wealth, our hard-earned wealth onto our children, our next generation. it's no way to run a country. it's immoral, in fact. but let's assume all these tax increases, the fact of the matter is this had budget still never balances, never comes into balance. and i was struck this morning, mr. chairman, by mr. mulvaney from south carolina during his one-minute speech when he said, you know what, when you contract with somebody to borrow money, that's what debt is. when you intend to pay it back. when you contract with somebody and have no intention of paying that debt back, that's thievery and that's exactly what we're doing, mr. chairman, to the children of tomorrow, to the people that do not exist, to

the people that don't have a vote in this matter. that's why i ask my colleagues to defeat this substitute budget. i yield back. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: mr. chairman, i yield myself 30 seconds. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: mr. chairman, the republican budget claims to be in balance. it is only in balance if you assume they can raise $5.7 trillion in new taxes and they will cut $2.5 trillion in health care and $1 trillion more in a category that includes social security and pensions. i'd also note that a great deal has been made about the capital gains and dividends benefits and 401-k's. i point out to the gentleman, in a 401-k, people don't get the benefit of that deduction. they don't get a tax. when they draw it out they draw it out as ordinary income. i yield two minutes to the

gentlelady from california, ms. lee. the chair: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for two minutes. ms. lee: thank you very much. i want to thank congressman bobby scott for your tremendous leadership in putting together the congressional black caucus' alternative budget and congresswoman marcia fudge in her bowled vision in helping -- bold vision in helping to move this forward. i had a chance to really get into the weeds of the republican budget, and i can say with certainty that i strongly support the congressional black caucus budget because it is pro- growth, pro-american people. i want to talk about congresswoman moore who so eloquently stated the jobs provisions of this bill. let me just -- of this budget. let me just kind of show you the chart with regard to the five million jobs that this budge creates. when you look at the fact that without the congressional black caucus' budget it will take us

into, what, april, 2015 to create enough jobs that takes us back to prerescission employment. that is not acceptable with so many people in our country unprovided. this budget enhances medicare, medicaid. it cancels the devastating sequester, and it raines in bloated pentagon spending. we actually end the overseas contingency fund. when the president's goal is accomplished in 2014 of bringing our young men and women is home from afghanistan, this really is a slush fund and it's not supported through the pentagon. it's a slush fund from over at the state department. this budget provides $230 billion to revitalize our nation's infrastructure and creates a $500 million jobs program to accelerate the nation's economic recovery. to help families stay secure in their home until our economy recovers, our budget funds critical unemployment benefits

to the full 99 weeks. also, we support a real effort to eradicate poverty in america th a formula, the 10/20/30 resources which target communities who need resources and we call for a national strategy by covering -- cutting it in half. the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. mr. scott: mr. chairman, i yield the gentlelady 30 seconds. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for 30 seconds. ms. lee: let me conclude by saying our budget protects the safety net and protects those initiatives which creates pathways out of poverty such as the earned income tax credit, the child tax credit, the snap program, food and nutrition assistance, the program that assists women with nutrition assistance when they're pregnant, all of these efforts are protected in the congressional black caucus' budget whereas the ryan budget would gut these programs. these are needed desperately as we move to a pathway to prosperity our budget is pro-

american, pro-growth and pro-people. thank you again. the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from georgia. mr. price: thank you, mr. chairman. i would point out to the gentlelady that in fact multiple economists have looked at the budget that republicans have brought forward and a couple from stanford had an editorial i believe in "the wall street journal" this week and noted their renew, their study, their -- review, their study, their evaluation of the republican budget is 1.7 million jobs would be made in the 10th year. if you want jobs there's a way to get it, get jobs created in this country and that is to reward individuals creating jobs and that's what the republican budget does. i'm pleased to yield three minutes to another new member of the budget committee and a member of the appropriations committee, the gentleman from mississippi, mr. nunnelee. the chair: the gentleman from mississippi is recognized for three minutes. mr. nunnelee: thank you, mr. chairman. our friends on the other side

have called for what they label a balanced approach. but let's look at the record. their quiverage for new taxes insatiable? at the start of the year they ot $600 billion in new taxes due to the fiscal cliff pill that passed. in addition, -- bill that passed. in addition, a total of $1.6 trillion in new taxes that have been added since new year's. but before the ink was even dry, they began to call for even more tax increases. in fact, the budget that we're discussing here calls for an additional $.8 trillion of taxes that will be paid for by hardworking men and women around america. taxes like if you sell your

house you'll have to pay an excessive tax on the gains from the sale of your house when you're in retirement. what do they do with their new taxes? do they take it and pay down the debt? no. instead, they take these additional taxes and use it to spend more. this budget is not content with obamacare that passed a few years ago. no, it expands that. i do commend our friends on the other side for at least showing your intentions, that you're not going to be happy until every american is on socialized medicine. and this expands obamacare. it also expands food stamps. at a time when projections are showing that our economy may improve, certainly we should see individuals moving away

from food stamps. and on to jobs supporting themselves. but that's not what we're seeing. a measure of a society should not be how many people can we put on public assistance. the measure of success of a society should be how many men and women can we allow to help themselves. but this budget does cut spending in one area. it cuts into our national defense. even more so than the president's budget that he submitted last year. so while we're increasing spending on things that would drain our economy and deprive our children of obtaining jobs, we're compromising the very defense of our nation. and when does it balance? never. mr. chairman, i reject this budget and urge you to vote no. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: thank you, mr.

chairman. i yield myself 30 seconds just before i yield to the gentlelady from the virgin islands. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for 30 second. mr. scott: the gentleman just complained about the obamacare taxes. what he didn't say is that the republican budget keeps all the taxes. they just repeal the benefits. the republican budget also does not cancel the sequester. the sequester is estimated to cost 700,000 to two million jobs. it does not cancel the sequester. in fact, they have additional cuts that would even add to those job losses. mr. chairman, i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from the virgin islands. the chair: the gentlelady from the virgin islands is recognized for two minutes. mrs. christensen: thank you. i thank you for yielding and thank you for an excellent job you did on the budget. the c.b.c. budget is proudly a statement of c.b.c. but also american values. as a physician i'm particularly proud of its investment in health. it protects and strengthens social security, medicare, medicaid and the children's health insurance. fully funds the affordable care

act, adds a public health option and includes provisions that will reduce health disparities. it fully funds the aids drug assistance program, mental health and substance abuse, maternal and child health, community health centers, the offices of minority health and the national institute for minority and health disparity research at n.i.h. it preserves healthy start, funds programs to increase the number and adversity of the health work force. gives communities the tools to improve health and well-being through restoring programs like reach, dental health projects, the national minority aids education and training center and other related programs, and it ensures that minority physicians and those practicing in poor neighborhoods and their patients will have the benefit of health information technology. it addresses the sose yo economic determinants of health beginning with the 10-20-30 program to reduce poverty. it will reduce health care spending in the medium and

long-term. it's a masterpiece of a budget and i urge everyone vote for it. yes, we will not be happy until every american has access to quality health care. i yield back. the chair: the time the gentlelady has expire thsmed gentleman from georgia. mr. broun: what time remains on both sides? the chair: the gentleman from georgia has three minutes remain, the gentleman from virginia has fife and a half minutes remaining. -- as five and a half minutes remaining. the gentleman from georgia has the right to close. mr. broun: may i inquire of my friend how many more speakers he has? mr. scott: i think we have two ore speakers including myself. mr. broun: we reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from -- to the gentlelady, ms. waters. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. waters: as a member of the congressional black caw us cus

-- caucus, i am proud to be here in support of the congressional black caucus budget. this is a bunnell that is balanced. this is a budget that is in opposition to the ryan budget that would slash and burn and cut and deny our senior citizens, deny our children, do away with head start and many programs that the american people deserve to have. i am a member of the financial services committee now serving as ranking member. i created the neighborhood stabilization program. the neighborhood stabilization program is a program that go into communities that have been devastated by foreclosures based on the subprime meltdown we had in this country where so many people were tricked into signing onto loans and mortgages they could not afford. thus they went into foreclosure. these communities have been devastated, with boarded up

homes, stray animals on the property, with police and fire having to spend more money in these cities to try to upkeep them. the ryan budget would do away with the neighborhood stabilization program. the home values must be maintained in these communities. some people are trying to keep up their home bus with these boarded up property the value of the homes go down. the neighborhood stabilization project is a project that would revitalize the properties, put them back on the markets as affordable homes, and instead of doing away with this program, that helps to keep the value of our american citizens' homes, we protect it. we protect it. the ryan budget would do away with it. thank the c.b.c. for understanding how to protect our neighborhood, how to protect our consumers, how to make our neighborhoods safe despite the fact that we almost went into a depression based on the financial services meltdown. i yield back. the chair: the time of the

gentlelady has expired of. the gentleman from virginia. plaintiff skth: is the close? n read dwroy mr. mulvaney: i have one more speaker in addition to myself. mr. scott: i reserve. mr. price: i yield to mr. garrett of new jersey. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one and a half minutes. mr. garrett: i thank the c.b.c. for coming to the budget something the president hasn't been able to do, i commend him for doing system of what sit we agree with in this, what do we disagree with. we do agree on several points such as we want to have a just and fair tax code, we want to make sure we address the most vulnerable, the out of work the poor in the country, those trying hard to make ends meet, to try to end poverty as well, to try to make sure there's

health care as well. where we differ if the c.b.c. is the impact, what their budget would have on each and every one of these. their impact would have a devastating impact on those who are out of work. those who are trying to not scrust get a handout but get a handup. those who are looking for health care and not being able to afford it. those who are looking for health care if the federal government and rerealizing that within a short period of time, over the next decade, we will see actually the money in the federal government for the health care that they're receiving right now basically run out that is why i applaud their attempt to come to the floor with a budget but i ask them to take a look at what the impact of their budget will do, as opposed to what the republican budget will do. we'll be able to create jobness in this country. we did so before in the jobs act which we passed in a bipartisan manner. we're going to take the next step to make sure there's a level playing field in this clint versus other countries to bring back the jobs that have been lost to other foreign

nations and bring them back to the country as well. eel be able to reform the systems with regard to the poor, we'll be able to provide for a system that provides for the american family with a just and fair tax code. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: i yield myself the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: the congressional black caucus budget budget reacts to this chart. this recession has been deerp and longer than any others. we haven't gotten the jobs back. at the rate we're going we're not going to get the jobs we lost in the 2008 recession for another two years. that's why it's important that the congressional black caucus has a budget that has $500 billion in jobs. that will create about five million jobs over the next -- as soon as we can get the money out the door, five million jobs which will significantly reduce the impact of that recession. that's in stark con it's a to

the republican budget which maintains the se quester, the suggestion there is that 700,000 to two million jobs would be lost system of we have a choice. five million jobs or lose jobs. we have a choice in terms of investments. in education, transportation, scientific research, investments in our future, or cuts in those investments. we have a credible path to achieve the simpson-bowles 10-year goal rather than a budget that depends on $5.7 trillion in unspecified tax increases to offset their $5.7 trillion tax cut that they say is revenue neutral. it also is a budget that requires massive cuts in medicare, medicaid, other health care programs, pensions, and everything else that will adversely affect those most in need. the one third cut, 25% to 30%

cut in medicaid, we have to remember that 2/3 of the medicaid expense goes to elderly and disabled. what is their plan for them if you're cutting medicaid by 25% to 30%? we can do better, we can have a progressive, pro-people, pro-growth, pro-jobs agenda. or we could have the cuts in the republican budget which has a $5.7 trillion unspecified tax cuts in it if you believe they will come up with that kind of money. i think we should make the right choice, and that right choice is the congressional black caucus budget. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from georgia is recognized for one and a half minutes. mr. price: i remind my friends on the other side of the aisle and those listening that the republican budget creates 500,000 jobs by the end of the first year and it will result in over one million jobs in the 10th year and it's important to

appreciate the chart he has about the jobs decreasing, the deepest and longest period of poor job growth in any recession and he's right, he's correct on that. but what this budget he does that he proposes is double down on policies that don't work, spending money we don't have is in the prescription for more job creation. a little honesty, on this, only in washington as the american people know is spending at a lower rate a cut. more spending at a lower rate in this town is a reduction, is a cut. the fact of the matter is that the republican budget increases spending on average 3.4%. four ar over the next years. it gets to balance, meaning we don't spend money that washington doesn't have. gets us on a path to paying off the debt.

it's that way that we realize we can create jobs for the american people, ensure that crung people will be able to get out of college and find a job in their sphere of education, and we can make certain that seniors have the kind of services that they need. mr. scott: will the gentleman yield? mr. price: it will be destroyed by the budget proposed on the other side. i urge that members of our party vote down the budget on the other side and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. mr. scott: mr. chairman. i ask unanimous consent to introduce a statement from the gentlelady from ohio, the chair of the black caucus, ms. fudge. the chair: the gentleman's request is covered by yen leave. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia. as many as are in favor will signify by saying aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes have it. the gentleman from virginia.

mr. scott: on that i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 3 prinned in house report 113-21. for what purpose does the entleman from jeas rise? mr. grijalva: thank you, to claim time in support of the -- the chair: is the gentleman prepared to offer an amendment. mr. grijalva: yes, the back to work budget as proprosed by the progressive caucus. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number three in the nature of a a substitute printed in house report 112-21, offered by mr. grijalva of arizona. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 122, the gentleman from arizona, mr. grijalva, and a member opposed, each will control 15 minutes. the chair recognizes the secret from arizona. mr. grijalva: thank you, mr.

chairman in presenting our back to work budget, the budget of the progressive caucus of this house, we are first mr. pleased to announce that in less than 48 hours, 105,000 citizen co-sponsors have joined with us in presenting this budget and they are pleased to affirm, and the point is house budget committee chairman paul ryan released a budget proposal that is most -- is the most reckless austerity plan he's ever proposed. instead of a budget that will slow -- instead we get a budget that will slow the economy and kill jobs. we urge you to vote for the progressive caucus' back-to-work budget which will grow the economy, create seven million jobs and ask the wealthy and multinationals to pay their fair share so we can make investments in our people and our future. 105,000 citizen co-sponsors in less than 48 hours. with that, let me introduce

co-chair of the prodepressive caucus mitigating circumstance friend the gentleman from minnesota, keith ellison, for two minutes, thank you. the chair: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized -- recognized for two minutes. mr. ellison: thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to just congratulate everybody with the progressive caucus an thank all the staff that did such a good job preparing this excellent budget which gives us an amazing choice as americans, to confront this jobs crisis. i'm so proud that our speaker has told the world, speaker boehner, that the debt crisis is not immediate. he's right, it's not. but let me tell you what is immediate. the jobs crisis. that's why the become-to-work budget brings down unemployment to 5.3% within three years by investing in people, our construction workers, our teachers, our police officers, we're also fiscally responsible, redeucing the deficit over the long run by $4.4 trillion.

the republican budget makes the wrong choices for our country. i respect the fact that they have honestly projected a vision but it's an austere vision for the american people -- for the american people. it's no surprise that this message lost the election that we just had. it was put in front of the people, they said we will have none of it. but the american people do want what's in the back-to-work budget. the -- gallup released a poll that confirms what you and i i already know, that is that the american people want jobs, not austerity. 72%, mr. speaker, of americans said that they support putting people back to work, repairing our nation's infrastructure, including a majority of republicans. now, the fact is that the back-to-work budget is about putting people back to work. as me and the speaker agree, it's not the moment where we need to clamp down on debt, it's the moment we need to put

americans back to work. and so, look, which budget meets the test? the progressive caucus budget invests in a level of the american society of civil engineers says is needed to close the infrastructure gap. the republican budget cuts transportation by 20%. mr. speaker, it's time to get back to work and let's pass the back-to-work budget. i yield back. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? >> i rise in opposition. the chair: the gentleman rises in opposition, the gentleman is eek nizz -- recognized. >> i rise in opposition to the progressive caucus substitute. mr. garrett: while my friends are having good intentions, i think it's a blueprint for a fiscal disaster. instead of restoring the certainty to the economy, by promoting fairness and providing american families the opportunity for more

prosperity, this budget is simply a black hole for american families. i can at least give them credit for both the progressive caucus and the democratic caucus for offering a budget because the president of the united states has failed to do so. as you are aware, on february 4, the president, as required by law, is supposed to give us a budget. it's march 20 now and the american people, well, we're still waiting. that's the fourth time in five years that president obama has failed to submit a budget in time, failed to abide by the law. since democrats, they are not much better. you know, it's taken them almost four years to bring us a budget that basically increases spending, tasses up by almost $-- taxes up by $1 trillion and cuts health care providers by almost $300 billion. over the period covered by the budget, deficits under the senate plan are nearly $4 trillion larger than under the house plan. so today we have a progressive substitute on the floor. this budget will do what? it will raise taxes by almost

$6 trillion over the next 10 years, including a new tax on carbon. $5.7 trillion in new taxes. it necessarily means greater tax burdens on, who, the american family. these tax cuts put job creators in the penalty box again, and that means more americans will be, where, without jobs. this is sold under a warp notion on what fairness is. in reality, the fairness of theirs is a heavy-handed government taking from one pocket and put it in another pocket. this budget's tax policy is based on the quality of outcome rather than quality of opportunity. now, when we talk about equality, friedman pointed out, he said a society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. a society that puts freedom before equality, however, will get a high degree of both. so true fairness is the freedom to manage and direct one's own life and one's own future. those who take risk, giving

their all in the pursuit of the american dream, they deserve to keep what they've earned. those that work day in and day out, they deserve to keep what they've earned. but the progressive budget is nothing but regressive. there's nothing fair about this budget, especially to the risk taker or to the hardworking american family. their budget would spend nearly $9 trillion more than the republican budget. i note when i say that as numbers, where does that money come from? that means from our children and grandchildren, this would be the ones to ultimately bear this burden. this would establish a government-run health care option under obamacare and let the government basically set price controls on drugs. what does that mean? that means those around back in the 1970's, i think that's most of us, price control was on gasoline. how did that work out for us? not too long. waiting in line for gas, that's one thing. waiting in line for life-saving medicines, that's another story. this budget would also expand the current and broken and failed federal job training program without any reform

whatsoever. and this budget calls for even more money for the bureaucrats in washington with regard to education. and this budget calls for even more money for the broken down highway transit system that we have in this country. and this budget even fails in the government's first responsibility, providing for the common defense. this budget further goes and guts the defense department by calling for almost $700 billion in cuts to the pentagon compared to our budget. this progressive substitute then would put this country basically on the wrong path. for that reason i urge a no vote on this budget. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from arizona. mr. grijalva: thank you, mr. chairman. somed aage if you do the same thing over and over again without -- some adage if you do the same thing over and over again without change that is mark of sanity. that is the same as ryan budget 2, ryan budget 1 and to 10 years of failed fiscal policy that our budget, putting people

back to work, attempts to get us out of that fiscal black hole. let me yield one minute to the gentlelady from california, congresswoman lee. the chair: the gentlelady from california is recognized for one minute. ms. lee: thank you, mr. chairman. let me thank congressman grijalva and ellison for their bold and visionary leadership of the progressive caucus. as a member of the budget committee opposed to the job-killing pathway to poverty ryan budget, i stand in strong support of the progressive caucus' back-to-work budget. the number one priority of the progressive caucus budget is fixing the job crisis, and that is exactly what we want to do in our back-to-work budget. that's what it does. and most economists argue that job creation equals deficit reduction. the c.p.c. budget asks the wealthiest 1%, big oil and corporations just a little bit more so we can invest in the american people and create seven million american jobs. our budget saves over $1.8 trillion in bloated pentagon spending by eliminating the overseas con-- contingency

slush fund. we refocuses or resource noose a modern military able to face 21st century threats. we also require the pentagon, the single largest federal agency with the highest waste, fraud and abuse to pass an audit test and to pass it now. it's the only federal agency not subject to an audit. our budget replaces the disastrous sequester by supporting critical spending in education, infrastructure and we reject benefit cuts to medicare and medicaid and social security. the chair: the time of the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from virginia. mr. garrett: at this point i yield three minutes to the gentleman from the budget committee. the chair: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for three minutes. mr. lankford: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise to give support for the path to prosperity. it's a responsible budget. i rise to encourage my colleagues it's a good thing for us to get a chance to talk about budgets and where we're headed. it's a good thing to have multiple options, to have a

dialogue. this is what's happening in the senate this week as well. for the first time in four years the senate has an ongoing dialogue about budgets and about the future. while almost $6 trillion of debt has been added to our children, we've not done a budget between the house and the senate in almost four years now. it's time to be able to do that and i encourage my senate colleagues bringing this up. i saw today in the news that the president has received his final four brackett and for the ncaa -- bracket and for the ncaa basketball bracket. we hope to see our interest on budgets and not ncaa brackets. the way you budget and you plan for the future and the way to set aside finances for the sut is some kind of certainty that's happening. -- for the rest is some kind of certainty that's happening.

if a ticking debt bomb is coming for them, they expect the people in washington to actually pay attention to that. so that the little bit of money they can set aside for retirement doesn't blow up in some giant debt crisis in the days ahead. this is a moment to deal with our debt. the budget that we're proposing is a responsible budget that takes 10 years to slowly start to bring us back into balance. drastic ashington is a draconian cut actually reducing the increase. what the ryan budget does, what we're proposing is a 1.6% decrease on the increase. right now the federal budget is scheduled to increase by 5% over the next 10 years. we'll actually increase the budget 3.4%. i would say that's fairly modest. that is a way to be able to deal what's happening in the nation and it's also a way to deal with what's happening to come in the days ahead. we're not promoting additional stimulus spending as the

current proposal is. it did not help us several years ago. at is promised is we'd be at 5.5% unemployment instead of hovering 8% as we are right now. if you want real jobs, it has to be in the private sector. that's the only thing that can be sustained. otherwise you're dependent year after year after year with additional taxes and additional spending. we need to have the private sector be engaged in this. the way to do that is to encourage the private sector with some level of stability. with that i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from arizona. mr. grijalva: thank you, mr. chairman. let me yield one minute to the gentlelady from illinois, ms. schakowsky. the chair: the gentlelady from illinois is recognized for one minute. ms. schakowsky: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to ask my colleagues to support the back-to-work budget. the back-to-work budget puts jobs first which is actually the best way to reduce our deficit. jobs equal deficit reduction. our budget will create nearly

seven million jobs and bring unemployment down to 5% in three years and protects social security, strengthens the critical benefits of medicare and medicaid. our budget responds to what the american people say they want -- job creation, more revenues from those who can afford to pay and smart spending cuts that target waste and not opportunity. a new gallup poll released found that 3/4 of americans, including a majority of republicans, support federal government efforts that focus on creating jobs. americans don't want austerity or tax cuts, more tax cuts for the rich. they want jobs, good jobs. so you can vote for good jobs by voting for the back-to-work budget, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. -- the chair: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: i now yield two minutes to the gentleman who played a critical role in passing the budget before us, the republican budget. the chair: the gentleman from

indiana is recognized for two minutes. mr. rokita: i thank the chair and the gentleman from new jersey. like speakers before me, i'm thankful and appreciative that people are proposing substitute budgets. it's good to have options, mr. chair. it's good to have debate, but not all option it's are equally good. so i rise against the substitute budget that's now before us. now, admittedly, there's a couple different ways, a combination thereof, that you can balance a budget -- spending cuts. and by the way, when a federal government already takes on average 20% of the value of all the goods and services that our country produces, a lot of us thinks that's more than enough to run the government and spending reductions are actually the solution, but revenue increases might also get you to balance. and that's certainly what this progressive substitute tries to do. nearly $6 trillion in tax increases over the next 10 years. and by the way, mr. chairman, they don't get to balance. it doesn't happen.

$6 trillion more of the people's property this budget confiscates and they still can't balance the budget. why is balancing the budget so darn important? well, couple different reasons. you cannot start paying off the debt until you get to a balanced budget so that you have a surplus to start paying that debt down. so their intention, mr. chairman, is not to pay down the debt. that's what they're stating in this budget. and frankly that's immoral. if you intend to pay a debt back and any contractual situation or even in this country's budget situation, it's called the debt. when you take money from future generations, when you take money from people that don't yet exist with no intention to pay it back, as this budget does have no intention of paying it back, it's called thievery. and that's wrong.

that's why this budget needs to fail and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from arizona. mr. grijalva: thank you very much. when in the course of the last decade-plus, multinational corporations, billionaires in this country have been favored with tax breaks, loopholes that have allowed to pay less than the average american, that has hurt the economy. i would suggest that aside from thievery, that is gaming the system and not sharing in the full responsibility we all have as americans to take care of this country. i would now yield one minute to the gentleman, to congressman pocan. the chair: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. pocan: the number one issue before our country is not the deficit. it's getting the economy going and creating jobs. we have 12 million people who

are still unemployed and millions more who are underemployed in this country. that's why the best budget we can put forward is one that creates jobs, not costing us two million jobs like estimated by the austerity policies of the republican party. it's not just the congressional progressive caucus that says this. our congressional budget office says that 3/4 of the deficit we're going to see in 2014 is caused by underemployment and unemployment. . it's not a new made up spending crisis, it's the need for jobs. the back to work budget makes a real commitment to job creation. creating seven million jobs and reducing unemployment to 5% within three years. it invests in education, police, firefighters, teachers, infrastructure, and end the job-killing cuts of the sequester. instead of balancing the budget on the backs of the middle class and neediest, the back to work budget as the back of america's

middle class. it does it while responsibly reducing the deficit by $4.4 trillion. i urge my colleagues to vote for the back to work budget. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from new jersey. >> thank you, mr. speaker. recognizing we can create the jobs and prosperity by not raising taxes at the same time, i yield now three minutes to the gentlelady. the chair: the gentlelady from missouri is recognized for three minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it's time for our nation to get our priorities right. and there's only a few things according to the constitution that we should be doing here in congress, and one of them is to provide for the common defense. and sadly this substitute bill guts our national defense and leaves us very vulnerable as a nation. let's rue view where we spend. -- review where we spend. a couple years ago the defense did some efficiencies under secretary gates cut $78 billion. then with the budget control act immediately $487 billion more cuts from national defense.

then equestions tration has kicked in -- then sequestration has kicked in, and this proposed budget here goes even beyond that. mrs. hartzler: our republican budget replaces the sequester in the national defense and keeps it a priority. make sure our men and women in uniform have what they need. this budget cuts an additional $658 billion from the pentagon. even secretary of defense leon panetta earlier said that with sequestration it would hollow out our forces. so certainly this would do even more. with sequestration if we don't replace it, which this budget does not, we are going to see 100,000 fewer soldiers and marines, the navy will likely have to mothball 60 ships, including two carrier battle groups, a quarter of our bombers, we would also see elimination of 250 fighter aircraft, and higher fees for mill -- military health care.

that's not providing for the common defense. in addition if sequestration is not overturned like our budget does, then we could see up to 2.1 million jobs cut. they are calling this budget a back to work budget? well, it's actually going to see our men and women in uniform, when they come back from afghanistan, instead of being met with ticker tape parades, they are going to be met with pink slips. it's wrong and we can do better. there are serious ramifications and our budget replaces those cuts. there are threats in the world. there is no time -- this is no time for us to be cutting our defense. we have iran threatening not only our neighbors but ourselves. getting closer to nuclear capability. we have even this week north korea shooting off a missile and putting out youtube videos of that missile coming here hitting not only cities in the united states, now they are even showing it hitting the u.s. capitol. in addition, there is radical islamists around the world that

still want to harm us. now is not the time to cut our national defense. we need to keep our priorities right. we need to provide for the common defense. we need to pass the republican house budget and reject the substitute that will hollow out our forces and endanger our families. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from arizona. mr. grijalva: the back to work together sets a level of 2006 for defense. the pentagon spending has doubled over the last decade. 2006 was the height of the wars in iraq, afghanistan, and the war on terrorism. we just celebrated the 10th anniversary of iraq. $2.2 trillion spent on that war. a war that i might say was not paid for at all. this does not cripple defense. this merely brings it to a realistic level and sharing in the reconstruction of this economy of ours. with that let me yield one minute to the gentlelady from california, ms. waters. the chair: the gentlelady from california is recognized for one

minute. ms. waters: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank mr. ellison and mr. grijalva for their leadership with the congressional prog caucus. i rise in support of the back to work budget. let me just say it again. back to work. this is what this budget is all about. ladies and gentlemen, investment in our infrastructure. we have bridges that are falling apart. streets that need repaired. water systems that need upgrading. we can create jobs. the republicans and the ryan budget talks about jobs. they talk the talk but they don't walk the walk. i try to get an amendment on the tiger program to increase funding for jobs in transportation which we need so badly. they rejected that. they rejected that because they are focused on making sure that they give tax cuts to the richest people in this country. making sure that they keep those tax loopholes for the privileged. not investing in america's future and america's growth. the people are expecting us to

make them their priority. to make sure that we are investing in opportunity for them, their families, their children, and their neighborhoods. no, the ryan budget pays no attention to any of that. these privileged people on the other side of the aisle who don't have to worry about jobs, don't have to worry -- the chair: the time of the gentlelady has expired. ms. waters: deny the people -- the chair: the time of the gentlelady has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? mr. garrett: i ask the speaker how much time remains on both sides? the chair: the gentleman from new jersey has three minutes remaining. the gentleman from arizona has 6 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. garrett: that being the case we'll reserve. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey reserves his time. the gentleman from arizona. mr. grijalva: let me yield one minute to my good friend, congressman mcdermott. the chair: the gentleman from washington is recognized for one minute. mr. mcdermott: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the chair: without objection, so

ordered. the cdermott: mr. speaker, back to work budget is the first budget that recognizes the truth about our so-called deficit crisis. we don't have one. speaker boehner, chairman ryan came on television on sunday and said, there is no immediate crisis. it is the unemployment numbers we should be worried about. now is not the time for austerity. it's the time for government to invest where the private sector won't. they are sitting on their money waiting. this is the time to bolster our new and growing industries like biomedical research and technology. now is the time to rebuild our infrastructure. creating jobs as this budget does is the only way we'll become self-sustaining. with lower unemployment, fewer people need public assistance, and more people pay taxes. that's how you shrink the deficit. that's the responsibility. my republican colleagues love to

talk about balancing household budgets. well, i don't know any american family that would use their children's lunch money to pay down their credit cards. that's what they are proposing in the ryan budget. most families choose to invest in college educations, health care, and retirement. trading current debt for future returns. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: we also continue to reserve. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from arizona. mr. grijalva: let me yield two minutes to congressman nadler. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. nadler: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise today to oppose the radical republican budget that will increase unemployment and savage medicare, medicaid, and other programs that families depend on. mostly to finance tax cuts for the rich and partly to fix a deficit crisis that we have already tamed.

in 2009 the deficit was 10.1% of g.d.p. next year it will be down to 5.3%. this is the largest and fastest reduction in deficits since the demobilization after world war ii. to add insult to injury, the republican budget would make sweeping regressive changes to the tax code by would raise taxes on middle class families by up to $3,000. millionaires would see a tax cut averaging $245,000 a year. this is just wrong. working families should never have to pay more just so the rich can pay less. we no longer have a deficit crisis. we do have a jobs crisis. with 12 million people searching for employment, and almost five million americans out of a job for more than six months. according to economic policy institute, the net effect of the republican budget would be to decrease, decrease the gross domestic product by 1.7%, resulting in two million additional jobs lost in 2014

alone. if budgets are truly a reflection of our values, what does it say about the priorities of the house republicans when their budget increases and health care costs to senior cuts two million jobs and its middle class families with a tax increase to subsidize another tax cut for the rich. in contrast, the backdoor budget adjusted the jobs crisis and on by creating nearly seven million jobs in the first year by making stark investments in our infrastructure, schools, and trits. protects medicare, medicaid, education, and family support systems. conservative governments in europe have instituted the same austerity policies sought by the republican budget. the result has been a double dip recession and 12% unemployment. we should learn from their stupidity. thank you. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: just to take a word from the gentlelady from california,er i yield now for 1 1/2 minutes who has actually walked the walk and created jobs and more american prosperity, mr. williams, for 1 1/2 minutes.

the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. williams: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you very much. we owe it to the american people to produce a smart, responsible budget. a budget that balances, that encourages job growth, and supports job creators. a budget that simplifies our overly complicated tax code and lowers tax rates for corporations and the middle class. this budget just doesn't add up. in fact, it further complicates the tax code and will greatly hamper job creation. it would create five new tax brackets for upper income individuals and small businesses. and would raise taxes on hardworking middle class americans. it's not good policy to raise taxes and it's not good policy to raise taxes ever. and especially not in the struggling economy. i know what it takes to run a successful business. i have owned and operated my small business for 41 years and it was said, i walked the walk. i talked the talk. and this budget won't work in the real world and it won't work in any world. this budget contains trillions of new tax, trillions of new

spending, and trillions more to the deficit. pretty soon this budget would need its own bailout. the american people deserve better. they begged for the ryan budget. i urge my colleagues to vote no on this substitute. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from arizona. mr. grijalva: mr. chairman, can i inquire as to the time remaining? the chair: the gentleman from arizona has 3 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from new jersey has two minutes remaining. mr. grijalva: let me yield 1 1/2 co-chair of the progressive caucus, mr. ellison. the chair: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. ellison: you know, mr. speaker, i want to congratulate my republican friends by convincing some americans that the only thing they should be thinking about is debt and deficit. while it is important, we acknowledge that, even speaker boehner last weekend said that it was not an immediate crisis. but the immediate crisis is the jobs crisis. so we should be comparing these budgets based on who creates more jobs. now, the progressive caucus back

to work budget creates seven million jobs in its first year, with jobs package that repairs 35,000 public schools, rehires 300,000 laid off teachers, and boosts consumer demand with a tax credit for working families. i believe my friend who just spoke said that we raised taxes on middle class families. not true. we cut taxes on middle class families. the republican budget would kill two million jobs in its first year by slashing investments in education, research, and public safety. now, by a job to job comparison, not just a debt to debt -- deficit to deficit comparison, again an important thing but not the most important thing, on the jobs measure the back to work budget is superior in every way to the republican budget. it puts people back to work doing jobs that need to be doing. the american society of civil engineers, experts who are

completely nonpartisan, have said we got 3.3 trillion in unmet maintenance needs. we make a down payment on that infrastructure gap and we put americans back to work with the back to work budget. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. who seeks time? to close. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey has the right to close. mr. grijalva: the back to work budget is a budget that's common sense and it reflects the values of the american people and it's the budget that deals with the realities of our economic time and our social times in this country. this budget is about investment. it's about saying that we -- greatest resource we have in this country is the american people. we need to put them to work. we need to educate them for the future. and we need to provide them with some economic security for the middle class, working people, so

they too can enjoy the economic benefits of this great nation of ours. we also do not step on those that are most vulnerable. we provide them with the security, with medicare, social security, and medicaid so that they, too, can continue to utilize the full benefits of those earned benefits that they have. this fiscal debate today with the ryan budget, too, and the other good budgets that have been proposed today, is merely an argument and debate about the values and future of this nation. the back-to-work budget takes us to the direction that in 10 years -- and in 10 years this country will be more solvent, more secure and unemployment will be down and the investment this time will pay off tremendous dividends for the

future. our budget's about the future, it is not about being meyered in the past as the -- mired in the past as the ryan budget is. with that i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. garrett: thank you. so here we are at the end of the debate. where are we? the progressive substitute, what would it do? it would raise taxes on the american family. it would increase spending throughout the country. it would put the programs such as medicare, to allow them to go bankrupt, if you will, within the decade in 2023. it would do all this and put the burden on our children and never ever balance. in contrast, before us is the house republican's path to prosperity. what does it do? it takes the first step, it takes the very first step towards reversing this trend, this path to debt and decline that the president and his fellow democrats on that side of the aisle and the senate as well, have laid out to the american people. see, the republican budget stops spending money that we do

not have. the republican budget simply does the right things in this area. it fixes our broken tax code. it does away with all those things, unfair corporate deductions and the like that we talked about, there's some commonality there. so it fixes our broken tax code and does so at the end day does what, increases jobs, increases wages and helps the american family. the american budget will protect, it will protect and strengthen medicare, national security, not allowed by the other side of the aisle. the republican budget will also reform our welfare program, such as medicaid, so they can actually deliver on their promise and not go bankrupt. look, every american family, every family in this country understands the necessity of having a balanced budget. the president and the democrats could surely learn by talking to them across the country. budgets are more than numbers. budgets basically come here to congress in these budgets, they set priorities, if you will. beyond that they have real

impact on human beings. unlike the progressive substitute that's before us right now, the path to prosperity will provide real economic security for workers, for parents. it will ensure security retirement for the elderly, for our seniors. it will expand opportunity for the young. for that reason i urge the chamber to vote on the side of freedom and opportunity and reject the progressive budget substitute. the chair: all time for debate on the amendment has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona, mr. grijalva. so many as in favor, say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. grijalva: mr. chairman, on that i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: a recorded vote is requested. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona will be postponed. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, proceedings will now resume on those amendments printed in house report 113-21 on which

further proceedings were postponed in the following order -- amendment number 1 offered by the gentleman from south carolina, mr. mulvaney, amendment number 2 offered by the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott, amendment number 3 offered by the gentleman from arizona, mr. grijalva. the chair will reduce to five minutes for any -- for time on any electronic vote after this first series of votes. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 1 printed in house report 113-21 by the gentleman from south carolina, mr. mulvaney, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 1 inted in house report 113-21 offered by mr. mulvaney of south carolina. the chair: those in support of a request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted.

a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 154.

the nays are 261. he amendment is not agreed to. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 2 printed in house report 113-21 offered by the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2 in the nature of a substitute printed in house report 113-21 offered by mr. scott of virginia. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of a request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. long leong. -- members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 105. the nays are 305. one member voting present. the amendment is not agreed to. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 3 printed in house report 113-21 offered by the gentleman from arizona, mr. grijalva, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 3 in the nature of a substitute printed in house report 113-21 offered by mr. grijalva of arizona. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested.

those in favor of a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 84, the nays will 327, one member voting present, the mendment is not agreed to.

it is now in order to consider amendment number 4 printed in house report 113-21. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? mr. woodall: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number four in the nature of a substitute printed in house report 113-21, offered by mr. woodall of georgia. the chair: the committee will be in order. he committee will be in order. pursuant to house resolution 122, the gentleman from georgia, mr. woodall, and a member opposed will each ontrol 15 minutes.

he committee will be in order. members are asked to take their conversations off the floor on he minority side of the aisle. the chair would ask members to take their conversation off the floor on the minority side of the aisle, please take your conversations off the floor. the chair recognizes the entleman from georgia. mr. woodall: thank you, mr.

chairman. my amendment is a budget -- the chair: the gentleman will suspend. i ask members to take their conversations off the floor. in the back of the chamber, on both the majority and minority ide.

i ask the members to take their conversation off the floor on the minority side. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. woodall: thank you, mr. chairman. i bring a budget today, a substitute, on behalf of the republican study committee a budget that balances the federal budget in just four years. and it does that, mr. chairman, by setting priorities for this nation, priorities that our constituents back home know need to be set. i want to begin, mr. chairman, by showing you the priorities as it relates to revenue and spending. within four years, we bring revenue above the level of spending so that we can begin to repay our debt, eliminate our deficits for the first time in -- since the clinton administration.

bringing deficits and revenues in line, mr. speaker. what we do is we prioritize those programs that are so important to so many americans. as you see from this chart, mr. speaker, social security spending up each and every year in our budget while extending the life of the social security trust fund. medicare spending up each and every year in our budget while extending the life of the medicare trust fund. mr. speaker, if a budget is nothing else, it is a statement of our values and our priorities. and the republican study committee's value and priority is to end the passing of responsibilities from this generation to the next, to rb -- to be responsible for the bills we create today and paying for those priorities today. four short years, mr. speaker, we can be out of this conversation about debt and deficit and begin the

conversation about freing the next generation from the $16.7 trillion that you and i and previous congresses have wracked up on their behalf. with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from georgia reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland rise? >> i rise in opposition. the chair: the gentleman rises in opposition. the gentleman is recognize. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. chairman. we had a discussion yesterday -- the chair: the gentleman will suspend. i would ask members to take their conversation office the floor. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: we had a conversation yesterday and today about different approaches to the budget an we had a discussion about the budget committee, the ryan budget that was on the floor and will be voted on later, that budget, of course, is an uncompromising budget and if

you look at this budget, it's even worse and on top of that, this budget has even more gimmicks than the earlier budget that we talked about. so what are those gimmicks? first of all, this budget says it comes into balance in four years. well, look, if you want to race to a fake balance, obviously you should vote for this one over the republican caucus budget. but the reality is, it gets to that balance by keeping the savings from obamacare which our republican colleagues say they want to eliminate, that they want to repeal. you don't have to take my word for it. the heritage foundation did a quick action alert on this budget. here's what they say. i'm quoting. another failing of this r.s.c.

budget is that like the committee budget, in other words like the principal republican budget, it keeps revenues near the levels reached with obamacare tax hikes even though it repeals the health care bill's spending provisions. so let's just be really clear what that means for the american people. they're repealing the spending provisions, that means they're getting rid of all the benefits in the affordable care act. including the provision to make sure that your child can stay on your insurance policy until they're age 26 so a family is not bankrupted by an accident or some disease that their child gets. it means the provisions that make sure people can't get denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions, that's gone. they can get rid of all that. but they keep the obamacare taxes. that's what the heritage foundation says. guess what. they also keep the savings from

the affordable care act in the medicare area that we achieve by ending the overpayments to some of the insurance companies and other changes in the incentive structure. we did it without hitting beneficiary, they've railed against that in the past but it's right here in the budget. here's the catch. they say their budget gets a surplus in just four years, well, the surplus is $22 billion, they claim. but here's how much of it comes from the affordable care act from obamacare. they got a little under $100 billion in revenue in that year coming in, then they've got medicare savings system of not close to balanced in four years without those provisions which as the heritage foundation points out are in there. even at the 10-year window, even at the end of a 10-year

window they claim to have a $246 billion surplus and yet they wouldn't get there without the savings in the affordable care act, obamacare. that's a hoax. to come to the floor and say, you've got to plans the punt in four years or 10 years but you're going to repeal obamacare, your budget doesn't work when you do that. that doesn't add up. they've got another big gimmick, it has to do with taxes. so the problem with the main republican budget is it will provide tax breaks to very wealthy people and help finance those tax breaks by bringing raising rates, by

the tax burden on middle income people. as we discussed earlier, we put that question to the test in the budget committee, we offered an amendment that says, when you do tax reform, don't make it a trojan horse for raising middle class taxes to finance tax breaks for the wealthy. protect the american middle class from tax increases, every republican on the committee voted no. so that's the problem with the main republican budget this one has another problem. t creates two tax systems. it says taxpayer, you get to hooze. then it assumes that they're going to hooze the one that's worse for them. if they choose the one that's better for the taxpayer from the taxpayer's perspective, they don't have enough revenue in their fwouget come to balance. look, the american people are smart you give them two

choices, obviously people are going to add them up and they're going to pick the tax return where they pay less. and if the american people are smart as i think they are, they will blow another hole in this r.s.c. budget. so i'm not even beginning to talk about the fact that they once again more than double the sequester cuts to places like n.i.h. and places where we do scientific research that they slash our investment in infrastructure. they do all that. they do even more of that than the other republican budget. but it has the same fundamental gimmick with respect to obama care and on top of that it has another tax gimmick in it. mr. chairman, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from maryland reserves his time. the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: while i regret the rules committee didn't give us more time to correct that misinformation, they gave us wonderful speakers. i'd like to yield four minutes to a former chairman of the republican study committee, the

gentleman from texas, mr. hensarling. the chair: the gentleman is ecognized for four minutes. mr. hensarling: i thank the gentleman for his leadership on this critical issue. we've heard from so many of our colleagues that budgets are priorities, and i believe this to be true. so what does it say about democrats' priorities when the president is almost two months late in submitting his budget and senate democrats have taken over four years to even bother to write a budget? i suppose it says, mr. chairman, that budget have a way of getting in the way of democrats as they wish to tax us more, as they wish to borrow more money from china, money our kids have to pay back, and budgets get in the way of democrats wanting to spend more of our money on a washington insider economy that doesn't work for the rest of us. now, we know that obamacare just raised $1 trillion of

taxes, much it falling on working families, the so-called fiscal cliff raised taxes almost another $700 billion, much of it falling on small business owners who can no longer offer raises, promotions or even hire new workers. and now all these democrat budgets are looking for an additional $1 trillion of tax increase on top of that. that comes to about $9,000 for every working household in america. mr. chairman, that's not fair. that's not helpful for this struggling economy. no nation in the history of the world has ever taxed its way into prosperity. america will not be the first. mr. chairman, no nation has every spent its way into prosperity either, yet the democrat budgets continue a spending spree that's driving us toward national bankruptcy. a day of reckoning is coming. you cannot have federal

programs going at 2%, 4%, 6%, 8% when the new reality under this president is 1.5% to 2% economic growth, and the family budget, which ultimately pays for the federal budget, is stagnant. now, the families i represent in the fifth congressional district of texas, they have several concerns. they want to feel more secure in their jobs. they want to quit seeing their paychecks shrink in the face of higher prices. they want a healthier economy where their success is dependent upon how well they work, not on who they know in washington. in other words, they don't want a washington insider economy where they can only succeed if democrats choose to invest in them. but mr. chairman, not every american belongs to a government employee labor union that supported the president in the last election. not every american has a

failing bankrupt solar energy company. and so for the rest of them, these hardworking americans, they want an opportunity and they want a main street economy that if they work hard and they play by the rules, every american can succeed. finally, the people i represent , they believe it's just immoral, immoral to saddle our children with these trillions of dollars of debt. that's why i'm proud to support both the republican study committee budget and the republican budget. they'll bring us a vibrant economy with a whole new tax code which is fairer, flatter, simpler and more competitive, a budget that is guaranteed to grow jobs and paychecks. contrary to the democrat budget, no tax increases on nobody. we quit spending money we don't

have, and i know my democratic colleague is very sensitive about the balance issue, because they have a budget which never balances. the american people demand one. the republican study committee and the house republican budget deliver it for a fairer economy, for a balanced budget, for a greater future for our children. we need to support these republican budgets. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. chairman. our budget focuses first and foremost on jobs and getting the economy growing. it does balance mountain same time that the republican budget -- it does balance the same time that the republican budget balances. we do not give tax breaks to the folks at the top financed by increasing taxes on middle-class taxpayers. i now yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from california, a great new member of the budget committee, mr. cardenas. the chair: the gentleman from

california is recognized for two minutes. mr. cardenas: thank you, mr. speaker. my friends across the aisle constantly say we should act like small businesses and families who balances their budgets. so let's look at families and businesses in this country. the fact is most american families don't have a balanced budget. when you graduate college, you mortgage or you go into debt either way. many families are suffering through unemployment or underemployment or even foreclosure. when you lose your job or your house, you don't just pack it in and say, well, i don't have a job any more, so no more food for me. no, you get your suit cleaned, get out there and interview. you get out your resume professionally printed, you invest in training courses to make yourself more marketable. you spend money to make money. it's the same thing for businesses. small businesses are not profitable right away. businesses take time to pay off a lot of startup costs like equipment, inventory, insurance, training, businesses have to invest to make business

work. sometimes your business goes into a slump, so you train your employees, you buy new inventory, you invest in your company so it will grow. you don't just stop investing. mr. speaker, the logic they use to create this fiction that responsible businesses and families are always in balance is simply not true. just like folks who are out of work or need to clean their suit and improve their skills, we need to build infrastructure and retrain our workers. just like businesses who need new inventory and new ways to sell, we need to find new technologies to build here at home and invest in the education of our future work force. the very examples they use, families and small businesses, are simply examples that demand investment, not austerity. you dress for the job you want, not for the job you have. let's pass a budget that invests in our country, in our future starting today.

thank you. i yield back my time. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: thank you, mr. chairman. at this time it's my great pleasure to yield two minutes to the chairman of the republican study committee, the gentleman from louisiana, mr. scalise. the chair: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for two minutes. mr. scalise: thank you, mr. chairman. i thank my colleague from georgia for yielding and for his leadership in bringing this budget to the floor. i rise in strong support of the r.s.c. budget that we have here today. i want to talk about a few of the great things that it does to help get our economy moving again and get our country back on track. first thing it does is it balances in four years. that's right. we really do think it's an important priority of this country that we balance the federal budget. i have a -year-old daughter and 3-year-old -- 6-year-old daughter and 3-year-old son and i don't think it's enough to ask that we balance the budget before they graduate high school. and we get our economy moving again through tax reform that's pro-growth oriented. it actually lowers overall rates and it closes loopholes so we can create jobs, be

competitive again and get the country moving on track again. another thing we do, we save medicare from bankruptcy. on the current path, according to president obama's own medicare actuaries, right now medicare is scheduled to go bankrupt in 11 years. we don't think it's responsible to let that happen, so we actually put a plan in place to save medicare from bankruptcy and ensure it for future generations. we actually repeal the job-killing obamacare. not just the policies behind it many of e taxes, which fall on middle-class families. let's contrast this vision, this document that's being criticized from my friends on the other side with the president's budget. what is the president's budget? it doesn't exist. today the president released his final four picks. he released his brackets. he's not a day late on that. yet under the law the president's now 45 days late on releasing his budget. and so what kind of set of priorities does that show the fact that the president doesn't

think it's important enough to meet the legal deadline to file his own budget. he's 45 days late and we know his final four picks. we're laying this plan forward to get a balanced budget and to get our economy moving and start putting some pro-growth policies in place so we can create jobs in this country. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. chairman. i now yield one minute to the distinguished new member from florida, ms. frankel. the chair: the gentleman from florida is recognized for one minute. ms. frankel: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to explain my strong opposition to the republican budget and strong support of the democrat budget amendment because it offers a balanced approach that is fair to seniors, the middle class and invest in the right priorities. i want to give an important example. my district is filled with people from all walks of life -- teachers, nurses -- who've

worked hard and spent their lives with the medicare guarantee. they live with the comfort of knowing if they get sick or injured, the health care will be there for them. i know this firsthand. my own mother beat cancer with the help of medicare. fortunately, i didn't have to make the choice that many americans will face under the republican budget, having to choose between helping a parent pay for a cancer treatment or saving for her own children's college tuition. it stops payments to insurance companies and incentivizing efficiency in our health care delivery. mr. speaker, we were sent here to get things done, to some problems, not to create new ones. and that's why i'll proudly vote for the democratic budget, and i yield back my time. the chair: the time of the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: thank you, mr. chairman. at this time it's my pleasure to yield to one of the

visionaries of the republican study committee, the gentleman from texas, mr. barton. the chair: how much time? the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. barton: i thank the gentleman from georgia. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the chair: without objection, so ordered. mr. barton: mr. speaker, there are a lot of reasons that i rise in strong support of the republican study committee budget. it repeals obamacare. it repeals the death tax. it repeals the alternative minimum tax. it authorizes the keystone pipeline. it authorizes drilling in anwr up in alaska. but the real reason and the primary reason is it balances and it balances sooner rather than later. the first four years of the obama presidency, our deficits have approached $7 trillion. $7 trillion. the president has yet to submit a budget that ever balances. none of the democratic alternative budgets ever balance. the republican study committee balances in four years. it reduces the deficit

immediately, larger, and it balances. if i were to come before this body and ask for an amendment to be made in order to spend an additional $1 trillion a year to infinity, i don't think too many people would vote for that no matter what was in it. that's basically what you do if you vote to never pass a budget that never -- that never balances. republican study committee budget balances sooner rather than later, it balances in four years. vote for it. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: i thank you, mr. chairman. i now yield two minutes to the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for two minutes. mr. connolly: mr. chairman, i thank my colleague from maryland and for his leadership on these very difficult issues. mr. chairman, if you like sequestration that cuts $1.2

trillion in discretionary domestic spending, you're going to love the republican budget which actually quintuples that. and then there's the r.s.c. budget that goes further. so while the ryan budget cuts $1 trillion over the next 10 years in investments, this budget, the r.s.c. cuts $7.7 trillion. and, yeah, it cuts -- it cuts funding, as the last speaker just said, but at what expense, at what cost? we are with this budget and with the underlying ryan budget, we are walking away from research and development investments, we're walking away from infrastructure investments, we are walking away from stem and education investments. those are the three legs of a stool that makes a great country great.

george washington was a big champion of infrastructure investment and education. abraham lincoln understood that in the midst of the civil war when he invested and this congress invested in the transcontinental railroad and the land grant college system, in the homestead act. yes, on even completing the dome of this building, because they understood it was important to invest in the uture of this country. these two budgets walk away from that future. they almost guarantee a bleak future for america with respect to the competition. the chinese aren't make theegs kinds of mistakes, we should not either. i urge defeat of both the r.s.c. budget, mr. chairman, and the ryan budget when it comes up. i yield back. the chair: the time has expired. the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: at this time it's my great pleasure to yield one minute to a colleague of mine

from the great state of georgia, dr. broun. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. broun: mr. chairman, i'm amazed by the sheer ignorance of the economic disaster that our country is facing. not only are our leaders ignoring this crisis, they're denying there is even a problem. this week we'll vote on six budget options and five of them actually increase spending above today's level. simply reducing the growth of spending will do nothing to address the economic emergency that we face. the idea that we're increasing spending but not as much as the other guy, is severely misguided. we have to dig deeper and make real, targeted cuts. there has to be a sense of urgency about it. only the r.s.c. budget actually cuts our baseline spending level and will lead to a

balanced budget faster than the alternatives. we must live within our means. i thank my friend, congressman woodall, for recognizing that we need to cut the outrageous spending and offering this budget today. i yield back. chip the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: may i ask how much time remaining on each side? the chair: the gentleman from maryland has 3 3/4 minutes remain, the gentleman from georgia has five minutes remaining. the gentleman from maryland has the right to close. mr. van hollen: i thank you, mr. chairman. i yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from new york, mr. israel. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. israel: i thank my very good friend from maryland, the raking -- ranking member of the budget committee, i thank him for his leadership and his common sense and for advancing approaches that make the right investments and the right priorities in this country and investments that expand the middle class, investments that provide for a balanced approach

and reduce our debt. mr. chairman, i rise to oppose the r.s.c. budget. as house democrats we believe we need solutions based budgets, not ideology based budgets. we need solutions-based budgets that rest on three pillars. number one, that take a balanced approach and reduce debt because we need to reduce debt. but do it in a balanced way. number two, that protects the middle class because the middle class is still struggling, make sure the middle class is protected. number three, that make the right and smart investments in the right and smart priorities. that don't ask us to foresake research in cures and diseases for disease, that don't allow china to move ahead of nuss research and engineering and science and technology, that keep us competitive in the world. we want budgets, solutions-based budgets -- mr. van hollen: i yield the gentleman another minute.

mr. israel: we want solutions-based budgets that aheave these three critical priorities and the way we do that and that is compromise. it is the ability of both sides of the aisle to pursue these three priorities in a balanced way. the budget before us right now is not about compromise, it is about ideology, it is not about commonsense and solutions, it is about extremism. the american people have sent us here to get things done, to find solutions to move them forward. let's not go backwards, mr. speaker. let's not continue gridlock, mr. speaker. let's find a balanced approach that rests on compromise and supports the middle class. and that is why i rise today in opposition to the budget before us and i thank my distinguished friend from maryland. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from dwea. mr. woodall: at this time it's my pleasure to yield one minute to a gentleman who came into the house with me in 2010, the

gentleman from kansas, mr. huelskamp. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. hules karp: i appreciate the opportunity to visit with you today, it's interesting as we sit here and discuss the balanced approach, how do you have a balanced approach, mr. chairman if you can't have a balanced budget? there are two different visions here, you either trust the people in washington who have given us $16.7 trillion of debt or you trust the merp people. what the r.s.c. budget does is trust the american people with their money, by taking back the big tax increase that was given taos in january, by taking away the big obamacare controls, that were given to us in 2010 and returns that power to the states and to the people and actually balances the budget in four years. this is real progress. this is a returning to the what the american people demand and what we need to create growth and prosperity in america is to pass these types of bunnells. i yield back. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired.

the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: i inquire of my friend if he has remaining speakers? mr. van hollen: we do not. mr. woodall: i yield myself such time as i may consume. you can find every bit of this udget at rsc.scalise.house.gov. this isn't about the math it's about laying out priorities. that's what every budget is. this provides flex to believe the states to care for poor and underserved in our health care communities. this budget provides the flexibility to seen dwrors find doctors, doctors that are no longer taking medicare today and are threatening the health care quality that folks like my mom and dad are having to contend with. this is a budget that makes tough decisions. you're not going to find a

family in this country, mr. chairman that hasn't had to make tough decisions during tough economic times and the question is, why won't the u.s. house of representatives, why won't the u.s. senate, why won't the united states president do exactly the same thing? we're trying to fulfill that request to the american people today, mr. chairman, in this budget. very word laid out right here. mr. speaker, responsible budgeting. prioritizing as we did our seniors who are counting on social security, our seniors who are couldn'ting on medicare, who are counting on thele is venncy of both of those programs, we ensure that that not continues, mr. speaker, because solvency is not guaranteed, in fact it's guaranteed not to be there under current funding systems, we change those systems to ensure that it will be. a sustainable path, mr.

speaker, a path where revenues and spending align, radical idea for this chamber, you'll hear it described in radical terms my my friends where spending and revenues align. and we achieve it. they say talk is cheap. that's why we back up this budget with real ideas, real proposals, real solutions. when they say talk is cheap and as my colleague from maryland begins to close, i want to observe that caulk in this -- that talk is in this case is not cheap at all. the words you'll hear from the gentleman from maryland in opposition to our proposal in support of his proposal are the different between the $33 billion surplus that our budget generates and the $5.1 trillion gentleman's he

proposal creates. these are not questions of math, mr. speaker. mr. chairman. these are questions of what nd of future do we want to leave to our children and grandchildren. we take difficult steps in this budget to begin to reverse the debt for the first time. in the absence of this budget, mr. chairman, in the absence of powerful ideas like what you see in the house budget committee budget, we relegate our children to a second class future, a future in which they owe $5.1 trillion more than the already immoral debt load that they face today. there is a better way, mr. speaker. there are alternatives in this town. we are presenting one right here. it's called the back to basics

budget. if the -- it's the product of the republican study committee. to close, mr. chairman, these things don't happen by themselves. while the president has been unable to produce a budget, we produced five in this house. it's because of the work like -- of folks like nick myers on my staff, because of folks like will dunham on the r.s.c. staff, i know the gentleman from maryland has the same kind of hardworking men working -- people working with him. these things happen because folk pus in hour after hour after hour. i hope america will support the product of their minds. thank you, mr. chairman. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. chairman. i think the american people know full well that the best way to attack the deficit right now is to help put more americans back to work. that's what people have, that's their sense in that country -- in this country and that's what the numbers show from the

congressional budget office. if you take the austerity approach recommended in this budget or the main republican budget, we know from the referees, nonpartisan congressional budget office, that we'll see 750,000 fewer jobs by the end of this calendar year. we know you'll see 200 -- two million fewer jobs next year which is why we say let's focus on the jobs deficit and address the budget deficit in a sustained way where we bring it down in a wlanned way, where we ask for shared responsibility, not another round of tax breaks for the folks at the very top and yes, we achieve balance in the same year the republican budget last year achieved balance but our priority is getting the country fully back to work. we also believe that when we put together these budgets, we shouldn't pretend you can have it all ways. and as i said repeatedly, the republican budget including

this r.s.c. budget is based on the one hand on the claim that gets to to -- it balance in four years, or in 10 years, but at the same time they're repealing obamacare and that just is not the case. it doesn't add up. if you're in a race to fake balance, then you should vote for this one because it gets to fake balance in four years instead of 10 years. but if you're in a race to put america back to work, vote for the democratic plan. thank you, mr. chairmanful the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. all time for debate on the amendment has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia. as many as are in favor will signify by saying aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: on that i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: a recorded vote is requested. those in favor of a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having

risen a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 10 4, the nays are two, the amendment -- are 222, the amendment is not agreed. it is now in order to consider amendment 115 -- amendment number five prinned this house report 122. for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland rise? mr. ran schollen: i rise to offer a substitute amendment. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number five in the nature of a substitute, printed in house report 113-21, offered by mr. van holen of maryland. the chair: the committee will be in order.

he committee will be in order. he committee will be in order. the committee will be in order.

the chair would ask members to take their conversations off the floor. the committee will be in order. the chair would ask members to take conversations off the floor. on the majority side and on the minority side. pursuant to house resolution maryland, ber from mr. van hollen, and a member 20 ed will each control

minutes. the committee will be in order. the chair would ask members to take their conversations off he floor on the majority side. the chair would ask members to take their conversation office the floor on the majority side nd on the minority side. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. chairman. today we are offering a budget with commonsense solutions that first focuses on the issue that's most pressing for the american people today, kicking our economy into higher gear. the chair: the gentleman will suspend. the chair would ask members to take your conversations off the floor.

especially in the back of the chamber, on both sides of the aisle. he committee will be in order. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. chairman. as i was saying we focus first and foremost on the priority of kicking our economy into higher gear and putting more americans back to work. we know from the congressional budget office, the professionals, that one-half of this year's deficit is due to the fact that millions of americans are still looking for work.

three quarters of next year's deficit is because we are not at full employment. our budget goes to the heart of the issue. it attacks the jobs deficit because we know we can't get the budget deficit under control until people are pack to work. and we take a balanced approach to long-term deficit reduction where we ask for shared responsibility. we do ask people at the very high end of the income ladder to give up some of the tax preferences and tax breaks they have. in order to help reduce the deficit. very different than the republican budget that doesn't close one tax loophole for the purpose of reducing the deficit that only lowers tax rates for those at the very top by increasing the tax burden on middle income americans. we make sure we can get back to work by replacing the sequester which we know will result in 750,000 fewer americans working at the end of this year.

and we have a jobs program investing in this program in the area of infrastructure to help rebuild our aging infrastructure and build the modern infrastructure nets to compete in the 21st century. those measures will make sure compared to our republican colleague's budget we have 1.2 million more americans working by the end of the year and two million more by the end of next year. we also make sure we keep our commitments to our seniors, unlike the republican budget we don't reopen the prescription drug doughnut hole which would mean seniors with drug costs would have to pay thousands more out of pocket over the period of this budget and we don't turn medicare into a voucher program that leaves seniors facing the risks and costs of education kalating health care costs in the future. we make sure that students

don't face a doubling of interest rates in july, schedule to go from 3.4% to 6.8%. the republican budget keeps that doubling of interest rates in place. we don't. we fully fund the transportation program for the next 10 years. the republican budget cuts it when we en at a time have 15% unemployment in this industry. mr. chairman, we get at the budget issues by putting more people back to work, by dealing with this in a balanced way, we reduce the deficit, way down so it's growing much slower than the economy, we stableize the debt, in the same time period the republican budget for the last two years balanced the budget. our focus is on jobs and the jobs deficit as a way to tackle the budget deficit. with that, i'm pleased to yield three minutes to my colleague

and friend from maryland, the distinguished whip, mr. hoyer. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. without objection, so ordered. mr. hoyer: i first want to thank the ranking member for the work that he's done on this budget. that he offers us an alternative. it is a reasonable alternative that can be implemented. to that extent it's a stark difference to the majority's proposal which will not be implemented and they know it. let me start with an observation. headline blunt report says g.o.p. needs to regroup for 2016. in that there is this sentence from the report, not from a democrat, not from the newspaper, not from an editorial writer, quote, we have become expert, we being the republican party report, we have become expert in how to

provide ideological reinforcement to like-minded people. with all due respect to my friend, mr. ryan, that's what his budget is. it is a vision. it is a vision that will not be implemented and he knows it. he knows that the appropriations committee will not be able to report out bills consist went his budget, nor will the ways and means committee come even close to reporting out bills that will implement his budget. why? because they're so draconian. and as i have said before, if every democrat were taken out of this house and every democrat taken out of the senate, you would not implement the ryan budget. now, mr. van hollen has put together a balanced plan. yes, it has revenues. and yes it keeps the affordable care act in place and yes it provides for funding for investment in growing our economy.

mr. ryan knows and i have great respect for mr. ryan, i have great respect for his intellect and frankly from time to time for his political courage. we voted together, we voted together on tarp. that was a tough vote for him. it was a tough vote for me. it was a tough vote period. but it was the right vote for the economy. we would have been in a depression had we not voted for that bill. and i congratulate mr. ryan on doing that. ut i lament the fact that we do not have an equally honest but tough resolution of a big deal in how to get from where we are, too much debt, too much deficit, to where we need to be, a fiscally sustainable path. we will not get there, i tell my friend, by vision alone. courage will be much more important than vision in that case. and mr. van hollen has shown courage by offering a budget that will provide for our people, for our country and for our economy.

i urge all my colleagues to support the van hollen alternative. why? because it is a responsible, fiscally implementble -- there's a word for you, fiscally doable alternative. to my friend's budget that cannot possibly be implemented, let me say -- mr. van hollen: i yield the gentleman another 30 seconds. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. hoyer: ezra kline who might not be your favorite writer says ryan's tax reform plan costs more than all his spending cuts combine. that's why i say it can't be implemented. if we were in private and there was no politics involved i think my friend would admit that. he shakes his head no. i didn't expect anything differently than that. ladies and gentlemen, this is an important statement of vision. it's an important statement of what our priorities are. it's an important statement to the american people, to seniors, to students, to

families, to children where our priorities are. the van hollen priorities are the right priorities for america. and i urge my colleagues to support the van hollen alternative and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin rise? mr. ryan: mr. chairman, i rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: i yield myself two minutes. i enjoy my friend from maryland, i appreciate his attempt to speak on my behalf. i will try to do that myself. there is one thing that is identical in this budget, the base budget, and the senate budget, it's the appropriations number, it's the one thing that is equal in both the house and the senate budget. the reason i rise in opposition to this budget, unlike what the gentleman just said, is there's no way this could pass. i would say the opposite. why? this budget never balances the

budget. will you hear mr. van hollen claim that in 2040, because of certain assumptions they on their own make that can't be verified by c.b.o., that they think they'll balance. it never, ever balances the budget. here's why. we're going to go from a $16-plus trillion debt to a $25 trillion debt in this budget period. what does this great budget do? it shaves $612 billion off the debt. it has a $1.2 trillion tax increase. it has a $476 billion spending increase. we got a trillion-dollar deficit, we're piling debt as high as the eye can see. and they bring a budget to the increasing spending? look, every budget we're looking at here offered by the other side, $1.2 trillion tax increase by mr. van hollen and a $476 billion spending increase. the congressional black caucus, a $.8 trillion tax increase

with a $1 trillion spending increase. the progressive caucus, a $5.7 trillion tax increase with a $4.6 trillion spending increase. here's the theme. take more money from the economy, take more money from families, take more money from small businesses, spend it in washington and hope everything works out. it's not working out. families are struggling because of this borrowing, because of this debt. we need to reject this amendment and go with something that works and that means balancing the budget to get a healthier economy, to create jobs, which is precisely what our budget does. with that i'll reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. chairman. i think if you ask the american people, they know what the challenges right now -- what the challenge is right now, it's getting the economy back in full gear and they're struggling because too many of them can't find a job and the republican budget will make

that even worse and that's not me saying it, that's not a democratic economist saying it, that's the professionals at the budget control office, the congressional budget office saying it. mr. ryan: would the gentleman yield? mr. van hollen: i don't have enough time. on your time, i'm happy to, my friend. but i can't do it right now. let me say another thing with respect to balance. it's really interesting. one of the reasons the republican budget that last year came into balance in 2040 and was able to balance this year is because the increase in per capita health care costs has come down significantly. in part because of the affordable care act and the changes in incentives. in fact, if you apply much more reasonable assumptions to our proposals, then the congressional budget office applied to the republican budget last year, you get balance. i know our republican colleagues don't want to hear it. now our focus and our priority is on dealing with the jobs deficit. that is the best way to redules

the long-term deficit and do it in a balanced way. i now yield two minutes to the very distinguished assistant democratic leader, my friend from south carolina, mr. clyburn. the chair: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. clyburn: thank you very much, mr. speaker. thank you so much for yielding me the time. mr. speaker, i rise in strong opposition to the ryan budget. the ryan budget ignores the expressed will of the american people and doubles down on the you are on your own republican platform that the republicans -- that the voters soundly rejected just a few months ago. rather than taking a fair and balanced approach to deficit reduction, the ryan budget will kill millions of jobs, slash needed investments, raise taxes on working families and create big new tax breaks for the wealthiest few. the ryan budget will block grant medicaid, voucherize medicare and rip up the safety net that's at the heart of the

social contract in this country. there are many words that can be used to describe the ryan budget. but the one word that cannot be used is balanced. i'm pleased that the democratic alternative and the c.b.c. budget that we voted on earlier both include versions of a proposal i have worked on for several years. we call it 102030. the purpose of the 102030 plan is to tart federal funds to communities that -- target federal funds to communities that experienced persistent poverty. specifically this proposal targets 10% of funding to neglected communities for a 20% or more of the population that's lived in poverty for 30 or more years. the 102030 plan was originally signed into law as a part of the recovery act.

t has proven successful in the needed rural development funds in neglected communities for water and sewage and economic development projects. it's time to build on this success and expand the 102030 plan. i'm also pleased that all the democratic substitutes reject the austerity for working families plan -- may i have 30 seconds? mr. van hollen: i yield the gentleman another 30 seconds. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. clyburn: thank you. democrats will honor our commitment to senior citizens and invest in a brighter future. the van hollen budget will create jobs now and that's the tried and true way to achieve deficit reduction. with that i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: at this time i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from kansas, ms. jenkins. the chair: the gentlelady from

kansas is recognized for two minutes. ms. jenkins: i thank the gentleman for yielding. today we are stealing from the next generation, our kids and our grandkids. we're making false promises that medicare and social security benefits will be there to take care of folks when we know that medicare is bankrupt in eight to 12 years. it's time for congress to do something, to help americans and their families. while house republicans seek to bring taxes and spending back to historical, stable levels, this country operated under for the past 60 years, and balanced the budget, there is nothing balanced about the democrats' plan. today we are spending more money than we did last year, we are collecting more taxpayer dollars than ever before and instead of cutting spending, the democrats' plan would add $4 trillion to the debt and take in another $1.2 trillion out of people's pockets, not to buy down our debt but to spend even more.

instead of raising taxes the house republican plan includes pro-growth, comprehensive tax reform, tax reform is critical to increasing u.s. competitiveness abroad as well as attracting business here at home. it will close loopholes and special interest deductions and credits for personal and corporate income taxes and lower the rates for everyone. i am pleased house republicans are the only people in this town with the courage to balance the budget. it's time to return the economy to an engine of growth and job creation and increased opportunities for all hardworking americans. this is what the house republican budget will achieve and this is what americans deserve. i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. chairman. the way to save medicare is to bring down costs overall in the health care system, not give seniors a voucher that puts all the risk on the senior which is what the republican approach

does. i now yield one minute to the gentleman from california, the distinguished ranking member of the energy and commerce committee, mr. waxman. the chair: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute. mr. waxman: mr. chairman, my colleagues, a budget shows our priorities for financial expenditures but our moral priorities as well. there are many reasons to oppose the ryan budget. but what it does to medicare and medicaid on the top of my list, they would end medicare as people have known it, rather than have a guaranteed benefit they turn it into a voucher. there would be no guarantee that people would be able to get the services they need and get those benefits provided to them under this voucher. and every year that voucher would be capped so they would have to buy a cheaper and cheaper policy with less and less benefits. for medicaid, the ryan budget cuts $810 billion, ending

coverage for over 70 million americans, 70 million are seniors or people with disabilities, 33 million are children who we want to have at least a chance for starting in life in the best of health. they would make this into a block grant. cut $810 billion, shift the costs onto the state, onto the providers, onto the beneficiaries. they don't hold down costs. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. waxman: i urge a no vote. the chair: the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: i yield myself 10 seconds to say that i think the people know over here that we're not proposing a voucher plan. premium support is quite different and it's the only bipartisan solution to save and shrink medicare. with that i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from indiana, a member of the budget committee, mr. rokita. the chair: the gentleman from indiana is recognized for two minutes. mr. rokita: i thank the chair and i thank chairman ryan for his leadership and all the members and staff of the budget committee. we have a good product here.

it balances and balance is important because until you balance you can't even begin to start paying off this debt. and we do that. the budget that's on the floor right now never balances. it might claim it does, but the math there is otherwise. i want to address the medicaid reforms that we put in our budget because they were just attacked. we believe in balancing the budget. we believe in balancing it not by raising taxes but by cutting spending. but you don't have to just cut to cut spending. you can reform. you can reform these programs, mr. chair, so that they're around for the generations to come. medicaid, a program that by all accounts is failing those whom it's intended to serve, needs reform. it leads to poor outcomes for patients, a 2010 study suggested that surgical patients on medicaid were 13% more likely to die, mr. chairman, than those without health insurance at all. that bears repeating. if you're a surgical patient on medicaid you are 13% more

likely to die. that needs reform. it drives away doctors who want to serve the poor. on average doctors who participate in medicaid earn 56% of what those in the private sector do. states on average now spend more on me cade than any other expense, including k through 12 education, and the dramatic expansion of medicaid under obamacare will only make the problems worse. we have to address these failing programs. states are doing it already. in rhode island with the help of a waiver from the federal regulations, they're able to take a cap in spending for five years and put everyone in managed care a success. in my home state of indiana, 40,000 more people who need the care were put on without one more dime of expense. reform is needed, reform cuts costs and reform will make sure the programs are around for generations to come. please do not support this budget, support the ryan plan.

i yield back. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: the gentleman from indiana made the point that under the current medicaid system, states have lots of flexibility, including indiana, to bring down costs. but when off tight program, cutting another $820 billion is not a lifeline, it's throwing them an anchor. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from maryland reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: i yield myself time to say, indiana is being denied waivers so they're being denied the freedom to use their program as they see fit. i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from wyoming, mrs. lummis. the chair: the gentleman is -- the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. lummis: i want to compliment the house majority party for putting together a budget that takes a balanced approach and it balances the interests of two very future

vulnerable groups. one is my age. in 11 years, i'm going to be on medicare and medicare is going to be broke. completely insolvent, absolutely broke. at the same time, earlier today, i met with some kids who were here with the close-up program and they were high school students, full of hope. and in 11 years, they're going to be starting families. buying cars and gasoline. and houses and insurance and raising kids. and they'll be at a financially vulnerable age. now, the house republican budget protects both of us. it makes medicare solvent for me. when i am there and i need the money. and it doesn't do it on the backs of those young high school students today that are 28 years old and saving for

their children's college and their retirement, it does it with a premium support system, not a voucher system, but a premium support system which is what i have as a member of congress. i get to choose from among government pre-approved programs that don't deny me for a pre-existing condition and i pay part of the premium and the government pays part of the premium. the healthy get less premium support, the unhealthy and unwealthy get more. it solves the problems. it's a balanced approach. i ask you to reject the minority party's budget and support the house republican budget. mr. chairman, i yield back. the chair: the time of the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from maryland. mr. chairman, it's now my privilege to yield one minute to the distinguished democratic

leader, just returned from the vatican, hopefully will bring some hope from the pope, as i say. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. pelosi: i thank the gentleman for yield, i thank him for his tremendous, tremendous leadership, and giving us an opportunity on the house today to vote on a budget that's a reflection of american values, the values of work and jobs, of promoting them, a value of fairness, a value of advancing the success of america's families. i think we can all be the judge, we say a budget is a statement of our national values, what is important to us as a nation, a place where we allocate our resources. and this is in stark, absolute contrast to the republican budget that is on the floor today.

contrast number one, jobs. the republican bill, the ryan republican budget, is a job killer. nearly two million jobs lost right out of the gate. nd more lost after that. the van hollen democratic substitute is a job creator. it invests and rebuilding the infrastructure, invest in innovation, energy, and education. speaking of infrastructure, society of civil engineers has given us a d in terms of the condition of the infrastructure in our country. so the need is there. this budget recognizes that need but it also does so in a way that creates jobs in a very innovative way. it is a strong contrast when it

comes to fairness. fairness as to how we, again, establish priorities to invest in education rather than ntinue to give tax breaks, loopholes that are unnecessary, unworthy of a values budget that the republican budget continues. in terms of our seniors, the contrast could not be greater. the ryan budget in 10 years, there will be no medicare guarantee, flat out, absolutely. there will be no medicare guarantee. in the meantime, the ryan budget takes the resources we have in the health care reform bill, repeals the bill and takes the money and runs to give toyota his priority, rather than strengthening

medicare, keeping it strong for a longer period of time, keeping the benefits in the affordable care act, prevention and wellness services right from the start, closing the prescription drug doughnut hole , i listened intently to the gentlelady speak about the high school seniors, 18 years old, where they'll be when they're 28 years old. since young people are always used as sort of the point of discussion and rightfully so, we're here to provide for their future, i think it's important to listen to what they have to say. and the young people that have passed through the capitol, as you know many do, i freerktly invite to sit down and tell me what they would like us to say at the table of the discussion of the budget, especially when it comes to them because we always say, we cannot heap mountains of debt on the next generation. i fully agree. and that is why i support the

van hollen budget. for these -- these young people say, we want a strong education system, a strong public education system. we need student loans that are affordable, we need pell grants, we need our families to be able to focus on us and so we need medicare and medicaid so that our grandparents' health needs are met for a long time to come, they hope, loving our grandparents. but these young people want to be helpful in solving the budget crisis. that's what they have told us. we want to do our share. the initiative that brings more money to the federal treasury is education. education, early childhood, k through 12, higher education, a post-grad, all the rest of that, lifetime learning. nothing brings more money to

the treasury than educating the american people. and that is why investing in education creating jobs, that brings revenue. it's hard to see why we would put forth a budget that stunts the growth of jobs, the growth of our economy with jobs, and our investments in education. on the subject of education, tens of billions of dollars are struck in the ryan republican anti-jobs bill. and that job killer bill, tens of billions of dollars. they say it's better to give a tax break to a special interest than to invest in the education of our children. would that be a statement of your national values, if you were writing a budget for our

country? oklahoma so. it certainly was not a statement of the values of the young people who have come through here saying how they would help solve the budget deficit challenge we face. we all know the deficit must be reduced. we've known it for a long time. we've recognized it for a long time. president clinton recognizes an took us on a path of fiscal soundness. it was totally reversed in the bush years, our republican colleagues didn't say a word, they said no problem, it's the appropriate percentage of g.d.p. new york problem with the deaf zit, they never complained about it. but now with their initiatives, the ryan republican job killer budget is making matters worse. in terms of reducing the deficit. because it deprives of our economy of the very initiatives

that would create growth. the education of our people, lifetime learning, for the american people. investments in education, as i said, nothing brings more money. investments in jobs, infrahave structure, energy, innovation, absent in the ryan republican job killer budget. medicare, so important to the stability of america's working families, the provisions in the affordable care act that affect medicare have already demonstrated that we're halting the rapid increase in cost of health care spending system of that is what has enabled the c.b.o. to say with more promise that we can use a different baseline to reduce the deficit and that has been used in the republican budget. i urge my colleagues to think about the kitchen tables of people in our country. we sit at a table here and have

these discussions. what's really important is how the decisions we make here, what we think and how that relates to the challenges they face, the education of their children, they're going to be able to keep their homes, keep their jobs, keep their pension, all of this heaped one on top of another of concern. and the economic an health security of our seniors. not only has an impact on them, the senior, but on our family. if we're going to be true to those young people, those 18-year-olds, we must have -- we must recognize how important their education is, and but also how important caring fir their grandparents is to the economic well being of their entire family. i'll end where i began. the most important part of all of this is the issue of jobs, jobs, jobs, and the fairness in our budget to promote jobs and

to reduce the deficit. for the success of america's families. the choice is clear. job killer ryan republican budget bill, job creator van hollen substitute bill. i urge my colleagues to support the van hollen bill and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the time of the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: yeah, i -- i'm not going to agree with that one, mr. chairman. i yield myself 30 seconds. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. ryan: the minority leader says she's concerned about the debt befalling the next generation. i'm glad to hear that. doing nothing the debt will go up 56% if we do nothing. if this budget passes, the democratic substitute, it will go up by 54%. that's basically doing nothing as well. jobs. the c.b.o. statistic the gentleman talks about, it's not

an element of this budget, it's the sequester. but the stanford economist who looked at this budget says we'll create 500,000 jobs in the first year and 1.7 million years -- jobs every year by the end of the budget window. faster economic growth, more jobs, balancing the budget, with that, mr. speaker, i would like to yield three minutes to a member of the budget committee, the gentlelady from indiana, ms. what horse key. the chair: the gentleman -- -- what horsekey. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. walorski: the goal is not just to check a pox. what we're discussing is about more than the procedure of a bunnell, we're debating the kind of future we're going to leave our kids. today the choice is clear. if congress does not get spending under control, our nation faces a debt crisis that will only make our financial situation worse. house republicans did recognize this and the urgency of the hour and we acted.

i'm proud poff worked with my colleagues on the budget committee to produce a budget that does make responsible reforms, promotes economic growth and job creation. the house budget does balance in 10 years. the democrats' budget doesn't balance at all within c.b.o.'s budget window, it includes a $1.2 trillion tax increase. our budget reforms the tax code and lowers taxes for everyone. hardworking hoosier families sit around the kitchen tables today, tonight, this evening and make tough choices to keep their budget. our household and businesses work hard to live within their means. and the federal government should do he same. . when i'm home in indiana and i'm in the grocery store on saturday mornings, there are moms that come up to me and they're worried about the rising cost of eggs. they're talking about the price of a gallon of milk. they're concerned about whether

their kids will have a future. will they really go to college? will there be jobs for them out of college? will there be jobs for them if they don't go to college? what happens when they do enter the work force? the truth is this, the uncertainty in washington is what burdens our families at home. time for us in washington to be accountable and pass a responsible budget. according to stanford university, in addition to what the chairman mentioned, their economists said that this republican budget would result in $1,500 more for each household by the end of 2014 and $4,000 more for each household by 2024. our budget includes commonsense policies that will spur investment and job creation and roll back the regulations that hurt businesses and stifle economic growth. history will be our judge -- will be judged by the future we leave to our children. if we refuse to make responsible, serious decisions about this budget, we'll jeopardize the american dream for future generations. we have to ensure that our

children have the same if not better opportunities to succeed than we have. i urge my colleagues to make a responsible decision, oppose this amendment and support the house republican budget and i yield my time. the chair: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. chairman. i now yield one minute to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. andrews. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. mr. andrews: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the chair: without objection, so ordered. mr. andrews: i support the van hollen budget because it recognizes that reducing our deficit is important and that fiscal restraint, spending cuts, more revenues in a balanced way is the way to do that. but i also support it because it chooses american economic growth over european-style austerity. prior to 1965 in this country, when you got old and retired, you moved in with your kids and hoped you didn't get sick. and only the very lucky or wealthy got to go to college.

in 1965 two things changed. we adopted medicare that said that retired people had health security. and we adopted the higher education act that said that sons and daughters of truck drivers and teachers could get a college education. what happened? prior to 1965 on a per capita basis, our economy grew by $323 per person per year. after 1965 our economy grew by $523 per person per year. investing in medicare, investing in education yields growth. the republican budget ends the medicare guarantees and will severely raise the cost of going to college for american families. vote yes on the van hollen plan. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: obamacare ended medicare as we know it. with that, mr. speaker, mr. chairman, excuse me, i'd like to yield one minute to the distinguished senior member of the budget committee, mr. mcclintock from california. the chair: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute. mr. mcclintock: thank you and i

thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. chairman, mr. van hollen recently pointed out the democrats and republicans both want to get rid of a range of tax loopholes but democrats want to spend that money and republicans want to lower the overall burden. that difference is very important. we have the highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world. that's the principle reason why we're losing american jobs to nations with much lower taxes. economist arthur lasters warned there's nothing more portable in this world than money. this policy might fit the left's eat-the-rich crusade but the jobs it destroys are eating our middle class alive. we are sacrificing permanent upwardly mobile, productive private sector jobs for makeshift subsidized ones that disappear the moment the money runs out. that's the difference between fedex and the post office or between apple and solyndra and

that is all the difference in the world. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland. has one minute remaining. mr. van hollen: i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from wisconsin has -- the gentleman reserves. so it's back in your court, mr. van hollen. mr. van hollen: thank you. i inquire again how much time remains. the chair: you have one minute remaining. mr. van hollen: thank you very much, mr. chairman. the fundamental choice here is whether we want a budget like the democratic budget that focuses on economic growth and strengthening the middle class or whether you want to take a budget like the republican budget which does impose european-style austerity by more than doubling the size of the sequester on essential investments to help the economy grow. investments in our infrastructure, when we know we have 15% unemployment in the construction industry. investment in our kids' education, not doubling the student loan interest rate in

july as the republican budget would do. investment in science and research, if we don't make those investments our global competitors are going to eat our lunch. and, yes, we do ask the very wealthy to get some of their tax breaks and loopholes to help contribute to the reduction of the deficit so that we can redules the deficit in a balanced way -- reduce the deficit in a balanced way that calls for shared responsibility and we don't ask middle income families to pay higher taxes in order to finance tax breaks for the wealthy. and, yes, we get the deficit down in a steady way, we balance it in the same year the republican bill balanced last year and we don't pretend that we're going to balance and get rid of obamacare at the same time. that's fake balance, not real balance. thank you, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized for two minutes. mr. ryan: mr. chairman, this green graph shows you the

revenues we've historically had in america. the blue line shows you the tax increases our friends are hoping to achieve. some of which have already occurred. the red line shows where you spending is going. we have a spending problem. by the time my kids are my age, the government will be taking twice as much money to spend on the federal government for this government at that time. austerity is what you do when you have a debt crisis. you raise taxes, you cut spending on current seniors to try and please the bond markets and stop the panic. that's the path that we're on. what we're trying to do is prevent austerity. what do we propose? let's grow the economy. let's reform the tax system, let's stop picking winners and losers through loopholes, lower tax rates for everybody, families and businesses to create jobs and commig growth. let's open up the resources we have in this country, oil, coal, gas so we can bring down gas prices. increase paychecks, create jobs, help manufacturing.

we have a safety net that isn't working. we have the highest poverty rates in a generation. 46 million people in poverty. we need to fix this safety net so so that it works to get people back on their feet again. we need to save medicare so that it's not bankrupt because it is on a path to bankruptcy. so that the current seniors can rest in comfort knowing that it's not going to be taken away from them, so that the obamacare rationing board won't take it from them and so that those of white house are younger can plan for it -- of us who are younger can plan for it. we need to balance the budget. balancing the budget is necessary for a healthy economy. for creating jobs. for giving our kids a debt-free nation. that's why we do this. their budget, despite what they say, never, ever balances. the budget the senate is considering today never, ever balances. the budget that they're talking about here, the budget that they're passing in the senate, it actually has a net spending

increase and don't forget the fact that taxes just went up by $1.6 trillion. what do they want to do? throw another $1 federal on top. guess what? they may say it's for the rich, they may say it's for the loophole, watch out, middle class. the tax man's coming to you. because that's exactly what all these deficits and all these tax increases are pointing at. taking more out of the paychecks of hardworking families. we're going to balance the budget and stop that from happening. that's why i urge a defeat of the van hollen substitute and passage of the base bill. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. all time has expired on the amendment offered by the gentleman from maryland. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from maryland. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. van hollen: mr. chairman, on that i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: a record vote is requested. all those in favor of taking

this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]